[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: RE: Project and Repository Philosophy

From: Monks, Peter <peter.monks_at_vignette.com>
Date: 2005-05-10 19:51:33 CEST

G'day again,

I think you're adding meaning to revision #s where there isn't any.
Even if you have different repositories for each of your projects,
there are still operations which will roll the revision #s without
necessarily resulting in any visible change to a checked out working
copy (eg. commits to a different branch).

Speaking from experience, I think your biggest challenge is going to
be getting the structure of your repository correct, and unless you
have a crystal ball handy I doubt you'll be 100% happy with your
first attempt. So to allow for refactoring of your repository later
on, I'd suggest that you put everything in a single repository, since
that minimises the effort of refactoring.

And regardless of which way you go, you're still going to have to deal
with the "confusing revision number changes" issue. Basically I see
two choices here:

1. explain to the developers the way SVN works, the reasons for having
   a single repos, and the implications of doing so (ie. rev #s become
   pretty much meaningless within a single project)

2. don't bother explaining and just tell the developers to ignore the
   rev #s since they are meaningless

The decision about which approach will work best for you is dependent
on your developers and how much time you have to spend on education.

As a data point, I administer SVN repositories for two completely
different organisations and in one case option #1 was more appropriate
(the developers were at a much higher skill / experience / interest
level) and in the other case option #2 was more appropriate (in this
case the developers' care factor was very close to zero).

Cheers,
Peter

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Monks http://www.sydneyclimbing.com/
pmonks_at_sydneyclimbing.com http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/4455/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xevious@heavyphoton.com [mailto:xevious@heavyphoton.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 10:19am
> To: users@subversion.tigris.org
> Subject: RE: Project and Repository Philosophy
>
> > G'day xev,
>
> Very good, and I appreciate the effort. However, like I said,
> I have read the docs (actually I have been playing with SVN for
> about 6 months).
>
> I am interested more in the tradeoffs between the two approaches
> that I mentioned.
>
> If we go with a separate repo for each project we then have to
> refer to builds as Foo rev 1792 with Business Objects rev 467.
>
> If we lump every thing together in one repo, it gives an artificial
> impression of activity to those too lazy to look at the logs. That is,
> Business Objects went from rev 467 to rev 1793 over the course of
> four weeks - in reality there was only a single change to Business
> Objects.
>
> Actual releases are not an issue as we always use meaningful tag
> names. I am just trying to keep the developer confusion down between
> releases.
>
> -xev
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue May 10 19:58:48 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.